By Khaled Mamdouh, IOL Staff Writer**

CAIRO, February 17, 2006 (IslamOnline.net) - Amidst the furor gripping the Muslim world over the insulting cartoons depicting Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him, four capitals in three continents witnessed four incidents, in a way, related to freedom of expression and the reaction is, to say the least, telling.

In the Egyptian capital Cairo, four prominent judges were stripped off their immunity on Wednesday, February 15, as a first step for them to face questioning in the state security court over charges they made of fraud in Egypt's legislative elections.

Three of them are accused by the regime of speaking to the press about the involvement of fellow judges in electoral fraud during the parliamentary elections last November and December, while the charge of the fourth judge is that he had sent a letter to the prosecutor general’s office asking for investigating fraud cases in Damanhur province.

The month-long election in Egypt has been marred by vote rigging, vote buying, intimidation of voters by security forces and state-sponsored violence that killed over a dozen citizens and injured hundreds others.

Reports of human rights groups and foreign diplomats, in addition to EU and US statements, have all decried the undemocratic practices that marred the elections.

Large numbers of judges manning polling stations have expressed their disgust at the state-sponsored practices and one of the four judges told reporters that the lifting of immunity was an act of "revenge" for talking to the press.

With the absence of a clear definition of terrorism, many fear Blair's terror glorification charge would send people to jail for what they think. (Reuters)

In Lisbon, Iran's ambassador was summoned by the Portuguese government on Wednesday, February 15, over remarks he made, expressing "his own views" on the Holocaust.

"When I was ambassador in Warsaw, I visited Auschwitz and Birkenau twice and made my calculations. To incinerate 6 million people, 15 years would be necessary," Mohammed Taheri said in the course of an interview Tuesday, February 14, with Portuguese state radio RDP.

Portuguese Foreign Minister Diogo Freitas do Amaral said, after summoning Taheri, that the remarks "were an unacceptable distortion of history", and added, in a statement, that the remarks "seriously offended humanity's collective conscience."

He said Taheri was told his statements and those of his government's over the Holocaust were unacceptable.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad himself has come under furious attacks over his own statements about the Holocaust.

"When our president wants to talk about the Holocaust with historians and scientists, the whole world is against him," Taheri said, referring to plans by Ahmedinejad to organize an academic conference on the Holocaust.

"Historians need to get together to give their opinions," the envoy added.

Washington said the new abuse picture should not have been release.

In London, the parliament passed on Wednesday an anti-terror bill making it a crime to "glorify" acts of "terrorism," prompting immediate cries and concerns from civil rights groups.

With the absence of a clear definition of terrorism, risks are that people may go to jail for what they think.

For example, Israel, backed by the United States and EU countries, considers the Palestinian resistance group Hamas a "terrorist organization," which means a British political analyst saying Hamas – winner of the parliamentary polls – is now the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people could face charges of "glorifying terrorism."

The main opposition British Conservatives and Liberal Democrats opposed the measure, which now awaits royal assent, citing civil rights concerns and arguing that current laws can do the job just as well.

But British Prime Minister Tony Blair thought that "what is important is that parliament has now sent out a very strong signal — it is not merely people who engage in acts of terrorism, but those who incite acts of terrorism or who glorify terrorism or who in any way encourage people to commit acts of terrorism either here or anywhere else."

He went on: "And I think that signal of strength is vital in circumstances where the threat that we face is not just from the individual acts of terrorism, but the people who celebrate it, who try to entice other people or recruit other people into doing it. I hope that message of strength is heard loud and clear."

The strongest signal on the controversy over freedom of expression came from the United States though, when US officials slammed the airing by an Australian TV channel of new images of abuse suffered by Iraqi prisoners at the hands of their US jailers.

The SBS channel aired on Wednesday previously unseen images of prisoner abuse at the notorious US-run Abu Ghraib in 2003.

Believe the move could further stock up anti-American feelings, the Bush administration said the images should not have been presented to the public.

A US state department legal adviser told the BBC the administration felt it was "better for the photos not to be released."

The same view was echoed by Pentagon and White House officials, saying the channel should have thought about the consequences before airing the images.

The four incidents qualify to be taken into account in the current debate over freedom of expression and whether that freedom is limit-free, considerations-free or not.

Also read: